– Business case(s) - for replacing the library management system
– Business case(s) - for replacing the library management system
Helpfully in some cases information is openly available on the web (typically through Council Agendas Minutes).
INDIVIDUAL CABINET MEMBER DECISION REPORT
Published on 7 February 2019
Report Title: Library Management System
Cabinet Member - Public Protection, Parking and Libraries
Value and costs
The estimated value of the proposed contract is £440,000 if the term continues for the maximum 10 year period. The said value would be within available budget. The revenue costs made up of support and maintenance for the required system software is estimated to be no more than £420,000 which will be funded via existing ICT revenue budgets. Note, dependent on the model from the supplier, the ratio between revenue and Capital may vary, with some suppliers weighting costs towards revenue, with other requiring greater costs relating to Capital in the implementation period. The implementation of the contract and capital hardware costs in respect thereof in the first year are expected to be between £20,000 and £60,000. Such costs shall be funded via the libraries capital budget. This Capital fund was awarded as part of Customer Programme funding in February 2016 (Cabinet Report and Full County Council MTFS report). Soft market test research has indicated that such implementation costs might not be incurred during the first year of the contract, but rather they may apportioned throughout the term of the contract.
What the proposed system will do and why it is necessary:
The Library Management Solution is the system that stores, processes and manages all stock and customer data regarding transactions, membership and ordering. The system will integrate with multiple systems such as SAP, Capita 360, and library solutions such as the Virtual library (eStock and reference services), PC booking system and self service kiosks and unattended access. The solution also manages the Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) processes for stock from ordering to quotes and receipt confirmation. The solution manages over 2 million customer lending transactions and manages email notifications to customers. It is used in 39 libraries in the county, plus the public sector mobile, Registration offices, and Library teams in Shire Hall and Oakley, Cheltenham.
– Selected Spydus from Civica
Extract below from Cabinet Agenda 5 NOVEMBER 2007
PROCUREMENT OF A LIBRARY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
1. To approve the implementation of the Civica Spydus Library Management System, provided by and managed by the SELMS library consortium.
2. To approve the upgrade of the library infrastructure as required, facilitating the upgrade to the library management system.
3. To approve that one-off costs of £345,000 and net year 1 costs of £88,000 be funded from the Efficiency Project Reserve and that appropriate amendments be made to Capital and Revenue Estimates.
4. To note that a net revenue saving, after allowance of £95,000 per annum for annual support and maintenance costs, of £381,000 is projected from 2009/10 to 2012/13 which will be taken account of within the Medium Term Financial Strategy.
London Borough of Ealing (2007) -selected DS (now Axiell) Galaxy as part of LLC (london Libraries Consortium)
Extracts below taken from council document: http://www.ealing.gov.uk/ealing3/export/sites/ealingweb/services/council/committees/agendas_minutes_reports/cabinet/15may2007-19may2008/13.11.07/Item_7_-_LondonLibrariesConsortium_.doc .
The finances worked out like this:-
|Capital Cost |
|Annual Support Maintenance
|London Library Consortium Outlay |
Software and Hardware purchases
|Installation, configuration and training||33,000|
|London Borough of Havering project management||3,000|
|LLC total capital outlay||128,000|
|LLC support costs per annum||85,000|
|Current DS support costs per annum||(57,000)|
|Increase in support costs per annum||28,000|
|Reduction of 2 FTE posts per annum||(55,000)|
|Net Revenue Saving per annum||27,000|
Reason for Decision and Options Considered
2.1.1 The Library Service’s Library Management System (LMS), Galaxy 2000, currently resides on a server in the computer suite at the Library Support Centre (LSC) in Perivale, along with several other local servers and communications equipment. The closure of the Library Support Centre in Perivale was identified as a budget saving for 2007/2008 and it is anticipated that this building will close by Summer 2008. This presents opportunities for the future for more cost effective management of the LMS.
2.1.2 The LMS server and other library systems servers will need to be re-located either to the corporate computer suite in Perceval House or hosted by a third party. Five options have been considered:
1) Re-locate the current system to the computer suite at Perceval House supported on a day-to-day basis by Service Ealing. The system hardware and software would require upgrading.
2) Re-locate the current system centre to DS Ltd Nottingham as a hosted FM service.
3) Purchase a managed LMS solution from Sirsi-Dynix. Ealing would pay an annual fee for this service. There is no Framework Contract involved in this option.
4) Buy into the South East Libraries Management System (SELMS) consortium Framework contract. This is a consortium of seven South Eastern Library authorities led by the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead, that have entered into a Framework agreement for the provision and external hosting of a library management system, Spydus, by their chosen supplier Civica plc.
5) Buy in to the London Libraries Consortium (LLC) Framework contract for an upgraded DS Open Galaxy system, which would be hosted by DS via the Consortium. The LLC is a consortium of 7 London Library authorities, led by the London Borough of Havering, that have entered into a Framework contract with DS Ltd. The current members of the Consortium are Waltham Forest, Redbridge, Richmond, Wandsworth, and Barking & Dagenham, Brent, and Havering, who project manage on behalf of the consortium. This option gives Ealing Council a lot of flexibility and offers new services to our customers. It offers value for money and a shared approach to product development.
2.2 Reasons for Decision: The Business Case
2.2.1 Factors that influence the choice of solution:
•The Library Service is seeking a cost effective solution that will enable staff savings in the financial year 2008/2009. External hosting within a consortium (Options 4 and 5) will enable some functions carried out by members of support staff to be transferred to the hosting service, thus saving a proportion of these salaries.
•In options 1 and 2, we retain our current system and simply re-locate the LMS server to either the computer suite in Perceval House or to the DS FM offices in Nottingham. Both options incur increased annual revenue costs. Although there is a smaller capital outlay than for the consortium arrangements there is no automatic upgrade to the system. The necessary hardware and software upgrades would amount to a comparable outlay over the next five years.
•Only the options of joining either the SELMS or LLC consortia offer the wider benefits of co-operative arrangements, such as
the potential for shared operations, e.g.: interlending, bibliographic services, ICT support and reserve stock management
the need for fewer support staff, representing salary revenue savings
The potential for improving performance against KPIs through a shared customer base particularly in the areas of reservation supply times and active borrower numbers. Issues per thousand population are also typically improved.
improved service to the public as they have access to a wider range of stock and services. The LLC customers have access to over 5 million items across London.
The increased power of influence of a co-operative group of customers over supplier product development
The economies of scale of co-operative consortium working.
The migration from the Library Services current system, Galaxy 2000/Open Galaxy, supplied and supported by DS Ltd to the LLC consortium DS system will be less technically problematic than migrating to either the Sirsi Dynix system (Option 3) or the SELMS consortium.
Entering into a Framework agreement with LLC or SELMS will not necessitate the process of tendering, as a Framework contract has already been tendered in accordance with the EU Public Procurement Rules. When the Framework contracts were originally advertised they left open the possibility of other authorities joining the consortia in the future. Thus Ealing is able to join without a further EU-compliant tendering exercise, saving both time and costs.
In summary it is therefore proposed to buy into the LLC Framework agreement. The proposed co-operative arrangements will have many service benefits for the public, will enable more streamlined and cost effective back office processes in line with Gershon principles, leading to further staff efficiency savings in future years.
4.1.1 The recommended solution can be financed from the £6.6m capital funding approved by Cabinet in March 2005 for the 21st Century libraries re-furbishment programme. The current amount remaining is £550k from the £1.1m capital originally allocated for upgrades and refresh; this covers both the capital cost of the recommended solution and associated communications reconfigurations.
–Selected Unicorn from SirsiDynix
An extract from the their council minutes (November 2008). They replaced their Dynix system with the Unicorn (now Symphony) system from SirsiDynix. The (PDF) documet in full Harrow_2008_ProcurementofReplacementLibraryManagementSystemreport.docA.ps.pdf
A replacement will assist the Council in achieving corporate priorities 1(customer satisfaction), 8 (increased opportunities for participation in sports and culture) and 11 (improve working and provide value for money). It will also provide some of the essential requirements for the Service Review recommendations on stock procurement and self-service
Why a change is needed
Although still fully functional, the system cannot handle such enhancements as electronically-transmitted orders, catalogue records that show jacket images, and self-service checking-in and checking-out of stock. In addition, indefinite technical support for Dynix cannot be guaranteed as more of its users migrate to newer products. Electronic Data Interchange (EDI), selfservice and the potential for use with Radio Frequency Identification triggers (RFID) are all part of the current Service Review recommendations to produce service efficiencies. The self-service options are of particular importance in avoiding increased staff costs for assistance and supervision when transferring a central library (mainly single-floor operation) to a multi-storey layout.
Deliverability of products and services offered:
User experience: site visits to UK public library customers and feedback
Identification of suitably qualified and experienced personnel who will be
responsible for the delivery of the contract.
1 Do nothing. The consequences of doing nothing include the potential lack of support for a system that is becoming obsolete; and the inability to offer service improvements such as an enhanced web-based catalogue for the public, EDI and self-service. This would mean that some Service Review recommendations on service efficiency would not be achievable.
2 Purchase a replacement system. Five companies bid for the contract, and four were shortlisted: DS, Geac (the company now called Infor), SirsiDynix and Talis. The functionality of the Geac and Talis systems was felt to be weaker than
either DS or SirsiDynix. The high cost of DS’s Open Galaxy system, and concerns about the company’s reputed slowness to meet customer requirements, were deciding factors in the selection of SirsiDynix’s Unicorn system. SirsiDynix has proved a reliable supplier of the library service’s existing ‘classic’ Dynix system, and though Unicorn is still evolving, it was felt that it had more potential than its competitors.
Resources, costs and risks associated with recommendation
It is expected that the cost of IT staff time will be contained within current support charges. Library staff time will be managed within existing resources.
The new library management system will require the upgrading of 110 PCs, at an approximate cost of £15,000, to cover extra memory and larger screens. Other costs are stated below under Financial implications.
There is a risk that the software will lack features to which the staff and public have become accustomed, but it is expected that these will be outweighed by new features such as improved search capabilities and a more customerfriendly interface. Past experience has shown that the supplier has been prompt in resolving problems. Although the financial position of the company is less healthy than its competitors, the value of this contract is less than 5% of the company’s annual turnover, well within the recommended maximum limit of 30%. It removes the risks associated with the expiry of the warranty on the current Dynix server, as a new server is a necessary part of the replacement LMS (whichever system was purchased).
The capital costs are £161,000 and within the approved capital budget. Revenue costs for the first year are £50,685 and over five years are £222,843.
Revenue costs will be contained within the current budget, since this is a replacement system with similar maintenance costs. Procurement followed the EU procurement route according to Financial Regulations. The inclusion of the self-service equipment will enable staff in time to be released for other duties at major libraries or prevent the need for additional
staff when moving to a site serving users over several floors. The EDI component should produce efficiencies in stock procurement. These are necessary to meet some cost-saving recommendations of the current service review of the Library Services.